Rating The Suspects.

[Abby Normal]

my problem with candidates like hyams, the other lechmere, smith, cohen, stephen, (not even gonna mention gull, sickert or maybrick in this list as they are just ridiculous) is they have absolute zero connection to the case not even a tenuous one, werent suspected by the police at the time and cant be placed anywhere near any the victims or locations. they are concoctions and extensions of the crazy/violent guy/ jew theory picked out of the bag by later "theorists". seriously, you could literally find anyone out of thousands in london at the time and fit them up under this criteria as a "suspect".

[Abby Normal]

i also think legrande should be on the list, he was certainly there at the time, involved in the case, was a shady character, and while not named by the police specifically he was suspected by, i beleive, a prison official.

[Abby Normal]

Well spotted Abby. It looks like Blackchapel has naturally assumed that the ‘Lechmere’ was Charles Allen Lechmere (Cross) but it wasn’t. It’s another Lechmere which Fiver put forward called GSC Lechmere. I’ll ask Fiver for the full name.

ah yes, the infamous other lechmere. i thought that had something to do with it. it would be interesting to know if they were related.

[Herlock Sholmes]

dumb question..
whats the difference between charles allen lechmere and charles cross?

Well spotted Abby. It looks like Blackchapel has naturally assumed that the ‘Lechmere’ was Charles Allen Lechmere (Cross) but it wasn’t. It’s another Lechmere which Fiver put forward called GSC Lechmere. I’ll ask Fiver for the full name.

[Abby Normal]

dumb question..
whats the difference between charles allen lechmere and charles cross?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Herlock -

The "Suspects" table you posted some months ago is excellent and useful! Respectfully, I would suggest the following modifications to make it easier to read:

Names last so that the columns line up and mistakes can be more easily spotted. For example, Hutchinson and Sickert are each missing a value.
Totals first and prepend "0" in front of single digits so that lines can be sorted by total easily.

13 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Kelly, James
11 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Bury, William Henry
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Cutbush, Thomas Hayne
09 = 2 - 1 - 4 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 | Deeming, Frederick Bailey
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 | Hyams, Hyam
09 = 2 - 1 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 | Grainger, William Grant
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Kosminski, Aaron (Aron Mordke Kozminski)
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Pizer, John "Leather Apron"
08 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Lechmere, Charles Allen
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 | Barnado, Thomas John
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Chapman, George (Seweryn Antonowicz Kłosowski)
07 = 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 | Tumblety, Francis
07 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 | Smith, G. Wentworth Bell
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Cohen, David
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Kidney, Michael
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 | Thompson, Francis
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Levy, Jacob
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Druitt, Montague John
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Barnett, Joseph
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Stephen, James Kenneth
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 | Stephenson, Robert Donston (or Roslyn D'Onston)
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Bachert, Albert
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Cross, Charles
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Hardiman, James
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - ? | Hutchinson, George
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Mann, Robert
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 | Maybrick, James
03 = 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - ? | Sickert, Walter Richard
02 = 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Gull, Sir William Withey

Much appreciate all your efforts!

Hi Blackchapel,

A bit of assistance is required. I’m fairly useless with tech (and I’m doing myself a favour by adding the ‘fairly.’) I just tried to make an improvement after a suggestion from Abby but as you can see, even though I put the letters running horizontally over the correct column they’ve now ‘bunched up.’

Any chance of you doing a table with the letters in the right place that I can copy and paste please? Also, 2 questions. I have an Ipad and use Pages. When I cut and paste the table that you created from Pages to the Forum the emboldened numbers revert to normal so I have to individually embolden them again. Any idea how I can stop that? And question two, when I cut and paste there’s a gap between each line so I have to move them back together after posting. It’s not a major issue but is there any way to avoid it?

Cheers

[Herlock Sholmes]

Good suggestion Abby. Here you go.


A = age/physical health - 2 = no issue, 1 = some issues creating doubt, 0 = serious issue/ could potentially eliminate.
B = location/access to murder sites - 2 = no issues, 1 = reasonable travel/possible doubt, 0 = serious doubt.
C = violence - 4 = killed woman (non-relative) with knife, 3 = killed female relative with knife, 2 = violence with a knife, 1 = violence without a knife, 0 = no known violence.
D = mental health issues - 2 = serious/violent, 1 = other, 0 = none known.
E = police interest - 2 = at the time, 1 = later (within 10 yrs) 0 = none known
F = hatred/dislike of women/prostitutes - 2 = yes, 1 = link to prostitutes, 0 = none.
G = medical/anatomical knowledge (inc. animals) - 1 = yes, 0 = no.
H = alcohol/drug issue - 1 = yes, 0 = none known.



A B C D E F G H
13 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Kelly, James
11 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Bury, William Henry
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Cutbush, Thomas Hayne
09 = 2 - 1 - 4 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 | Deeming, Frederick Bailey
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 | Hyams, Hyam
09 = 2 - 1 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 | Grainger, William Grant
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Kosminski, Aaron (Aron Mordke Kozminski)
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Pizer, John "Leather Apron"
08 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Lechmere, Charles Allen
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 | Barnado, Thomas John
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Chapman, George (Seweryn Antonowicz Kłosowski)
07 = 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 | Tumblety, Francis
07 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 | Smith, G. Wentworth Bell
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Cohen, David
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Kidney, Michael
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 | Thompson, Francis
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Levy, Jacob
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Druitt, Montague John
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Barnett, Joseph
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Stephen, James Kenneth
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 | Stephenson, Robert Donston (or Roslyn D'Onston)
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Bachert, Albert
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Cross, Charles
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Hardiman, James
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Hutchinson, George
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Mann, Robert
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 | Maybrick, James
03 = 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Sickert, Walter Richard
02 = 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Gull, Sir William Withey


sorry Abby, tech problem with the letters at the top I’ll ask Blackchapel for advice.

[Abby Normal]

Thanks for that Blackchapel. I much prefer the way that you’ve set it out so that’s the format I’ll use from now on. I’ve added the two missing values too. Well spotted.

13 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Kelly, James
11 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Bury, William Henry
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Cutbush, Thomas Hayne
09 = 2 - 1 - 4 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 | Deeming, Frederick Bailey
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 | Hyams, Hyam
09 = 2 - 1 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 | Grainger, William Grant
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Kosminski, Aaron (Aron Mordke Kozminski)
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Pizer, John "Leather Apron"
08 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Lechmere, Charles Allen
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 | Barnado, Thomas John
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Chapman, George (Seweryn Antonowicz Kłosowski)
07 = 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 | Tumblety, Francis
07 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 | Smith, G. Wentworth Bell
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Cohen, David
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Kidney, Michael
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 | Thompson, Francis
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Levy, Jacob
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Druitt, Montague John
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Barnett, Joseph
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Stephen, James Kenneth
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 | Stephenson, Robert Donston (or Roslyn D'Onston)
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Bachert, Albert
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Cross, Charles
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Hardiman, James
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Hutchinson, George
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Mann, Robert
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 | Maybrick, James
03 = 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Sickert, Walter Richard
02 = 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Gull, Sir William Withey

nice work gentleman. can you add the 8 criteria at the top so we know which numbers line up to which category?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Herlock -

The "Suspects" table you posted some months ago is excellent and useful! Respectfully, I would suggest the following modifications to make it easier to read:

Names last so that the columns line up and mistakes can be more easily spotted. For example, Hutchinson and Sickert are each missing a value.
Totals first and prepend "0" in front of single digits so that lines can be sorted by total easily.

13 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Kelly, James
11 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Bury, William Henry
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Cutbush, Thomas Hayne
09 = 2 - 1 - 4 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 | Deeming, Frederick Bailey
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 | Hyams, Hyam
09 = 2 - 1 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 | Grainger, William Grant
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Kosminski, Aaron (Aron Mordke Kozminski)
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Pizer, John "Leather Apron"
08 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Lechmere, Charles Allen
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 | Barnado, Thomas John
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Chapman, George (Seweryn Antonowicz Kłosowski)
07 = 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 | Tumblety, Francis
07 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 | Smith, G. Wentworth Bell
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Cohen, David
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Kidney, Michael
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 | Thompson, Francis
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Levy, Jacob
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Druitt, Montague John
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Barnett, Joseph
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Stephen, James Kenneth
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 | Stephenson, Robert Donston (or Roslyn D'Onston)
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Bachert, Albert
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Cross, Charles
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Hardiman, James
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - ? | Hutchinson, George
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Mann, Robert
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 | Maybrick, James
03 = 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - ? | Sickert, Walter Richard
02 = 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Gull, Sir William Withey

Much appreciate all your efforts!

Thanks for that Blackchapel. I much prefer the way that you’ve set it out so that’s the format I’ll use from now on. I’ve added the two missing values too. Well spotted.

13 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Kelly, James
11 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Bury, William Henry
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Cutbush, Thomas Hayne
09 = 2 - 1 - 4 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 | Deeming, Frederick Bailey
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 | Hyams, Hyam
09 = 2 - 1 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 | Grainger, William Grant
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Kosminski, Aaron (Aron Mordke Kozminski)
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Pizer, John "Leather Apron"
08 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Lechmere, Charles Allen
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 | Barnado, Thomas John
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Chapman, George (Seweryn Antonowicz Kłosowski)
07 = 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 | Tumblety, Francis
07 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 | Smith, G. Wentworth Bell
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Cohen, David
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Kidney, Michael
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 | Thompson, Francis
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Levy, Jacob
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Druitt, Montague John
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Barnett, Joseph
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Stephen, James Kenneth
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 | Stephenson, Robert Donston (or Roslyn D'Onston)
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Bachert, Albert
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Cross, Charles
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Hardiman, James
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Hutchinson, George
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Mann, Robert
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 | Maybrick, James
03 = 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Sickert, Walter Richard
02 = 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Gull, Sir William Withey

[Blackchapel]

Herlock -

The "Suspects" table you posted some months ago is excellent and useful! Respectfully, I would suggest the following modifications to make it easier to read:

Names last so that the columns line up and mistakes can be more easily spotted. For example, Hutchinson and Sickert are each missing a value.
Totals first and prepend "0" in front of single digits so that lines can be sorted by total easily.

13 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Kelly, James
11 = 2 - 2 - 3 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Bury, William Henry
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Cutbush, Thomas Hayne
09 = 2 - 1 - 4 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 | Deeming, Frederick Bailey
09 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 | Hyams, Hyam
09 = 2 - 1 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 | Grainger, William Grant
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Kosminski, Aaron (Aron Mordke Kozminski)
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Pizer, John "Leather Apron"
08 = 2 - 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Lechmere, Charles Allen
08 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 | Barnado, Thomas John
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Chapman, George (Seweryn Antonowicz Kłosowski)
07 = 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 | Tumblety, Francis
07 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 | Smith, G. Wentworth Bell
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Cohen, David
07 = 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 | Kidney, Michael
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 | Thompson, Francis
06 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Levy, Jacob
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Druitt, Montague John
05 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 | Barnett, Joseph
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Stephen, James Kenneth
05 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 | Stephenson, Robert Donston (or Roslyn D'Onston)
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Bachert, Albert
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Cross, Charles
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Hardiman, James
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - ? | Hutchinson, George
04 = 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 | Mann, Robert
04 = 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 | Maybrick, James
03 = 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - ? | Sickert, Walter Richard
02 = 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 | Gull, Sir William Withey

Much appreciate all your efforts!

[Filby]

Apologies for the late response Filby. I take your point. It would perhaps be difficult to get a consensus as to which criteria deserve more weight though. It’s certainly a fair point though.

Agree, yes and no apologies necessary. I very much appreciate all of your methods for assessing suspects.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Interesting statistical analysis. I would even go so far as to apply some weighting to each criterion - such as "Police Interest" - for me that should be weighted higher in its rating than Anatomical Knowledge.

Apologies for the late response Filby. I take your point. It would perhaps be difficult to get a consensus as to which criteria deserve more weight though. It’s certainly a fair point though.

[C. F. Leon]

... (other than probably being in the West End during the period). ...

Oops: Typo that I didn't catch at the time: should be EAST End, of course.

[sigh] I'm going to the back yard and eat worms...

[Filby]

Maybe there’s little or no value in this exercise but I did it anyway. I tried to apply a tick box checklist to a list of suspects that I selected from CJ Morley’s book. The scoring is my own of course but I’ve attempted this in a totally impartial way.

I reserved the right to immediately dump someone like Charles Akehurst who scared a woman in November 1888 or Alaska which was just an example of a fanciful story. Many of those names listed are nothing more that curiosities, attention-seekers or drunks. I’ve also left out any ‘sex’ category because the ripper was undoubtedly a man in my opinion. Also if it can’t be shown that a suspect was definitely in the country at the time of the murders I will eliminate them; might have been isn’t good enough imo. (sorry Trevor).

On the Police Interest criteria I won’t give a point to someone like Barnett who was questioned by the police but any partner/former partner would have been and there’s no evidence that he was ever seriously considered a suspect.

I’m working on the basis that Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly were definitely victims, so if a suspect was incarcerated, out of the country or dead for any of those I’ll eliminate him.


The scoring system is my own of course…



1. Age/physicality - 2 = no problem, 1 = some doubt*, 0 = eliminated imo.

* Maybe a suspect is much older than we would expect for a serial killer or there were health-related issues.


2. Location - 2 = no problem, 1 = reasonable travel/some doubt, 0 = eliminated imo.


3. Violent - 4 = killed with a knife, 3 = violence with knife against woman, 2 = violence with knife against man, 1 = other forms of violence, 0 = no known violence.


4. Mental health issues - 2 = serious/violent, 1 = other, 0 = none known


5. Police interest - 2 = at the time, 1 = later, 0 = none known.


6. Hatred/dislike of prostitutes/women - 2 = yes, 1 = links to prostitution, 0 = none known


7. Medical/anatomical knowledge - 2 = yes, 1 = slaughterman/ butcher level, 0 = none known.


……,,,,,,……,,,,,,……,,,,,,……,,,,,,……,,,,,,……,,, ,,,…… ,,,,,,……,,,,,,……,,,,,,……


Bury > 2 - 2 - 4 - 0 - 2 - 1 - 0 = 11

Cutbush > 2 - 2 - 3 - 2 - 0 - 2 - 0 = 11

Kelly > 2 - 2 - 4 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 = 11

Hyams > 2 - 2 - 3 - 3 - 0 - 0 - 0 = 10

Chapman > 2 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 2 = 8

Kosminski 2 - 2 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 = 8

Tumblety > 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 2 - 2 - 2 = 8

Thompson > 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 2 = 7

Barnado > 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 = 6

Cohen > 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 = 6

Levy > 2 - 2 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 1 = 6

Druitt > 2 - 1 - 0 -1 - 1 = 5

Barnett > 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 = 5

Stephen > 2 - 1 - 0 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 = 5

Stephenson > 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 2 = 5

Bachert > 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 = 4

Cross > 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 = 4

Hardiman > 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 = 4

Hutchinson > 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 = 4

Mann > 2 - 2 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 = 4

Gull > 1 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 2 = 4

Maybrick > 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 = 3

Sickert > 2 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 = 3




Happy to here comments/suggestions of course.

Interesting statistical analysis. I would even go so far as to apply some weighting to each criterion - such as "Police Interest" - for me that should be weighted higher in its rating than Anatomical Knowledge.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Without trying to detract too far from this thread (sorry Herlock) I just wanted to add that for those who believe Alice McKenzie WAS a Ripper victim...then Dr Barnardo almost certainly WASN'T the Ripper.


I say this because this following article refers to an event that occurred on the 16th July 1889, less than 24 hours BEFORE McKenzie was murdered...



Dr Barnardo's appeal was rejected and based on this report, he was sent to prison just a few hours before McKenzie was murdered.

This is particularly interesting because it has been assumed that Barnardo didn't spent any time in jail; especially in the late 1880's.

But... the attached report suggests otherwise...unless he used his charm to walk free at the 11th hour.



RD

Thanks for that RD.